Search form

Vigil for 3000 U.S. Troops-Not One Death More

Submitted by kmccook on December 30, 2006 - 2:44am

"Not One More Death, Not One More Dollar"
The American Friends Service Committee is joining with local peace and justice groups worldwide to commemorate the lives lost in Iraq on the occasion of the 3,000th U.S. military fatality in Iraq. On the day after the 3,000th death is announced, we will hold local events in communities worldwide, mourning all the lives lost in this war and calling for U.S. troops to come home.

Comments

Here is a question for your tyrannical buddy in Cuba, comrade kmccook:(at: http://4freadom.blogspot.com/2006/12/are-you-watch ing-fidel.html)How does a tyrant feel when listening to another tyrant's neck snapping?So, In-Fidel, how's does it feel to have the noose of time closing inaround your well-fed, pampered, and well-stiffened neck?Hopefully 2007 will bring a new birth of liberty to Cuba.Whenever this happens, my sad prediction is that the ALAand FAIFE will be deaf, dumb, and blind when the truth beginsto leak out about the REAL situation that librariansand citizens have had to slave under all these years.If I am wrong I'll buy you a Cuban cigar. Speaking of which, I better getmy supply ready for the day of the next dictaor's death.**********Sometimes a little peace on earth takes war. The American Friends may not like that; but history bears it out. Thankfully, the resistance in Cuba, both vocal and those who choose to remain silent and play the game, is decidedly non-violent. So, when the tyrant dies there we can all hope for peace with as little lucha as possible.

"Anyway, that's off topic. They have a right to their opinion and activism. I just wonder what kind of activism they were engaged in with regards to Iraq when year after year the international human rights community came out with report after report about the atrocities the ex-tyrant inflicted upon citizens? My guess, prove me wrong, is that they were pretty silent about it....""Whatever Kathleen may have done, she didn't supply Saddam with material used in his crimes, as did the Reagan and Bush I administrations. Kathleen didn't block UN condemnation of Iraq gas attacks simply because Saddam was gassing Iranians instead of Kuwaitis. Our government did so.

Walter,Any group styling itself as a resistance that isn't taking any actions (protests, civil disobedience, strikes, boycotts, even violence) isn't a resistance at all, merely a debating society.You cannot label a group as a non-violent resistance if there is no resistance involved.Passivity is not the same as non-violence. If you studied the history of real non-violent resistors, including MLK, you'd understand this.

In deference to "Walt", he'd rather that folks identify me as Walter at LISNews.Walt was here first, so he gets first dibs on Walt.I mentioned Cuba only because the two lands have/had tyrants in their recent history: one dead; one dying. (See reply to Daniel)OK, as for AFSC, if the reason for the memorial was only to honor and remember the 3000 troops who have died (not sure if the figure stands below or above that now), that wouldn't be controversial. It would be compassionate and patriotric. The AFSC is and always has been at the forefront of far left political activism; it is not officially endorsed or widely supported by most of the nation's Quakers, to my knowledge, though many Quakers may support the group as individuals.Anyway, that's off topic. They have a right to their opinion and activism. I just wonder what kind of activism they were engaged in with regards to Iraq when year after year the international human rights community came out with report after report about the atrocities the ex-tyrant inflicted upon citizens? My guess, prove me wrong, is that they were pretty silent about it....As an aside, the AFSC site makes the false and bizarre claim that hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have died "in this war." While the number is large, and each one is tragic, this borders on hysteria. Why can't most of these groups make their claims and try to change public opinion without distorting the figures?Surprise, surprise, I must now commend AFSC, for looking at their website they are to be added to the very long list of groups that has taken note and protested the jailing of independent librarians in Cuba.See here: http://www.peaceworkmagazine.org/pwork/0403/040307 .htmFrom their peaceworkmagazine.

Sorry, Daniel, you're just confused about what I said. I really wasn't bringing together Ghandi, Thoreau, and Merton, just making a point about the non-violent philosophy of almost all Cuban resistance groups IN Cuba.Isn't it obvious what Cuba has to do with Iraq, with regards to my post?One land has a dead tyrant; the other land has a tyrant nearing death.A lot of people feigned popularity when Saddam was in control of the secret police.A lot of Cubans feign loyalty now just to eat, or to avoid jail. Wait till the curtain fallsand people there can speak freely.

"Thankfully, the resistance in Cuba, both vocal and those who choose to remain silent and play the game, is decidedly non-violent."You confuse non-resistance with non-violence. Remaining silent and playing the game or simply complaining, is not non-violent resistance, as anyone who has given a passing study to either the movement for Indian independence or the US Civil Rights Movement could tell you.Thomas Merton's Nonviolent Alternative can also help to explain the difference between nonviolent resistance and the passive acceptance of one's fate.I agree with you that war is sometimes justifiable though much rarely than it is fought. That is why you can search my public writings and find no opposition to our war on Afghanistan. I don't think the post-war occupation has been handled well, I think our efforts there were CRIPPLED by the President's obsession with Iraq, but I understand why we went to war with the Taliban. Al-Qaeda was being openly supported by the Afghan government, which made Osama bin Laden commander in chief of Afghanistan forces. bin Laden's al-Qaeda group launched a direct attack against United States soil. The Taliban didn't want to give us bin Laden or close the al-Qaeda training camps. These couldn't be allowed to continue to operate. No other means seemed realistic to close them other than to topple the Taliban gov't.The Iraq War failed to meet any realistic criteria of self defense. That's why not a penny should have been spent on it in the first place.And what does Cuba have to do with Iraq anyway? Other than both countries have US troops on their soil without popular consent?

To avoid spending another dollar in Iraq, we'd have to be able to withdraw in 0.00032 seconds. That's because we spend 3,086 dollars on the Iraq war EVERY SINGLE SECOND.How do I get that? The Iraq Study Group report estimates that we spend $8 billion a month on the Iraq War. Doing the math, this works out to:

$8,000,000,000 Every month

$266,666,667 Every day

$11,111,111 Every hour

$185,185 Every minute

$3,086 Every second

To put the monthly figure in perspective, last year the Alaska State Legislature appropriated $7.9 Billion to run the ENTIRE state of Alaska for ALL of FY 2007. New roads, fisheries management, health care for tens of thousands of Alaskans, and much, much more.If we put $8/billion a month into alternative energy resources, we could have put oil out of business years ago and broken the back of the Mideast Islamist power structure, which is heavily dependent on oil revenues.If we were measurable making things better in terms of security, in terms of infrastructure, in terms of the population hating us less, I could understand the cost in lives and treasure. I would understand this even through I still believe (as I have since 2002) that this war against Iraq was unneeded and hurt our security.But it's not. Just take a look at the graphs at the Iraq Index and other publicly available information. Violence continues to track up, services continue to track downwards. And a strong majority (61%) of the country supports attacks on US forces. This figure would be even higher if not for the Kurds. Support for attacks on US forces runs 70% plus among Shia and over 90% among Sunnis. We are not making a difference and the country neither wants us or needs us.We should make a security pact with Iraqi Kurdistan and remove our military presence from the rest of Iraq. We should continue economic aid and offer unlimited out-of-country training for Iraq's police and military.

"I just wonder what kind of activism they were engaged in with regards to Iraq when year after year the international human rights community came out with report after report about the atrocities the ex-tyrant inflicted upon citizens? My guess, prove me wrong, is that they were pretty silent about it...."Ever since George W. Bush decided to go to war with Iraq in Spring 2002, war supporters, other far-right pundits, and folks like yourself have peddled the idea that war opponents enabled Saddam Hussein in his crimes.But the available public record shows that it was the very countries that invaded Iraq, along with a few other Western countries, that either provided Saddam with material or provided cover at the UN to avoid the consequences of his genocide.In the case of the United States, it was some of the very same personnel (i.e. Rumsfeld) who aided the Saddam regime in the 1980s, that advocated for the war. And had the temerity to brand all war opponents as Saddam lovers.So, as respectfully as I can be for hearing this empty charge for four years, I ask you to stop smearing the integrity of war opponents. Unless you can come up with either a check from Saddam or a Rumsfeld style photo with the dictator, or a Reagan style letter talking about the desirability of tilting towards Saddam's Iraq.If you want to condemn the enablers of Saddam, call Reagan/Bush staffers, not the Friends Committee.